FAO Grants Boost Community Restoration – But Where Is Zimbabwe?

On a bare hillside above Chimanimani, the scars of Cyclone Idai still catch the light each dry season. Gullies widen, streams run brown, and fields that once held maize now give up more stone than soil. Local groups talk about planting vetiver grass, fruit trees, and indigenous woodland, but one question always hangs in the air: where will the money come from?

A new funding window launched by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), with support from the Government of Germany, speaks directly to that question – though, for now, not yet to Zimbabwe. The Supporting AFR100 Programme has opened Direct Beneficiary Grants (DBG) for locally led forest and landscape restoration in selected African countries, offering between USD 5,000 and USD 50,000 per project.

The scheme is designed to strengthen on-the-ground restoration efforts under the African Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative (AFR100), a continent-wide drive to bring degraded land back to life while improving livelihoods. For village cooperatives, women’s groups, and community-based organisations in the target countries, it is a rare chance to secure flexible finance for practical work in the field.

What Is The Supporting AFR100 Programme?

The Supporting AFR100 Programme is FAO’s contribution to the broader AFR100 initiative, which aims to restore millions of hectares of degraded landscapes across Africa. Rather than focusing only on big government projects, the programme leans heavily on local organisations and communities to lead the actual work.

At present, FAO is implementing Supporting AFR100 in six countries:

• Democratic Republic of the Congo,
• Kenya,
• Madagascar,
• Malawi,
• Togo,
• United Republic of Tanzania.

FFA Explainer:

AFR100 – the African Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative – is a voluntary, country-led effort to restore degraded and deforested land. It links climate action, biodiversity, and rural livelihoods. Countries make political commitments, then work with partners like FAO, the AU, and development banks to turn those pledges into funded projects.

The Supporting AFR100 Programme’s core idea is simple: if local people are trusted and supported to manage their land better – planting trees, protecting rivers, shifting to more sustainable farming – restoration can scale up in ways that last. The new Direct Beneficiary Grants are meant to put money directly into the hands of those local actors.

How Do The Direct Beneficiary Grants Work?

The DBG mechanism offers small and medium-sized grants to registered local organisations already involved in restoration or sustainable land-use work. Grant sizes range from USD 5,000 to USD 50,000, awarded in local currency, and are meant to fund concrete activities on the ground.

Priority activities include:

• Tree planting initiatives,
• Agroforestry projects,
• Soil and water conservation measures,
• Establishment and management of community nurseries,
• Biodiversity conservation,
• Restoration-based livelihood development,
• Sustainable land-use practices,
• Value chain strengthening linked to restoration.

The focus is not just on planting trees for the sake of it. The scheme encourages projects that combine ecological recovery with economic opportunities – for example, integrating fruit or nut trees into cropping systems, or linking community woodlots to small timber or honey value chains.

FFA Explainer:

Agroforestry combines trees with crops and/or livestock on the same piece of land. In a Zimbabwean context, that might look like fruit trees shading beans, or Faidherbia albida trees dotted through a maize field. The trees improve soil fertility, provide fodder or fruit, and help buffer farms against heat and drought.

Who Can Apply – And From Where?

Although the Supporting AFR100 Programme works in six countries, the current DBG call is open only to organisations operating within designated programme landscapes in four of them:

• Democratic Republic of the Congo,
• Kenya,
• Togo,
• United Republic of Tanzania.

Organisations must be:

• Legally registered,
• Based in one of the eligible countries,
• Operating inside a recognised AFR100 programme landscape,
• Able to demonstrate capacity to implement restoration activities,
• Compliant with all eligibility conditions in the official Applicant Guidelines.

Groups outside these four countries – including Zimbabwean organisations – are not eligible for this particular round, though future calls could potentially expand the list.

For now, community-based organisations, cooperatives, and civil society groups in DRC, Kenya, Togo, and Tanzania have until 19 June 2026 to prepare and submit their proposals.

What Are The Grants Trying To Achieve?

FAO’s Direct Beneficiary Grants are designed around several linked objectives:

• Promoting landscape restoration and ecosystem recovery,
• Strengthening community resilience to climate and environmental shocks,
• Supporting sustainable agriculture and forestry practices,
• Enhancing biodiversity conservation,
• Creating income-generating opportunities tied to restoration,
• Encouraging local ownership of long-term restoration efforts,
• Building stronger restoration-related value chains.

In practice, that might mean a women’s group in western Kenya setting up a tree nursery and earning income from selling seedlings, or a farmer association in Togo organising contour bunds and vetiver strips to stop soil erosion on communal fields. The grants are meant to scale up what local actors are already attempting, rather than parachute in new ideas from outside.

This approach dovetails with UN SDG 15 on life on land and SDG 13 on climate action, as well as AU Agenda 2063 goals on sustainable resource management.

Why Does This Matter For Zimbabwe, Even If It Is Not Eligible?

Zimbabwe is not on the current list of countries for the DBG call, but the themes at the heart of AFR100 are deeply familiar here. Under National Development Strategy 1 (NDS1), government has pledged to improve land management, expand climate-smart agriculture, and tackle deforestation and land degradation.

From the granite hills of Mutoko to the sandy soils of Gokwe, local groups are already experimenting with many of the same activities FAO wants to fund elsewhere:

• Community woodlots to supply tobacco-curing fuel and reduce pressure on indigenous forests,
• Conservation agriculture and tied ridging to hold water and soil on sloping fields,
• Farmer-managed natural regeneration of trees on cropland,
• Small irrigation schemes that blend food crops with riparian buffer zones.

The AFR100 DBG model offers several lessons Zimbabwe can adapt:

• Direct funding to local actors: Channeling small and medium grants to ward-level organisations can move restoration from policy documents into planting holes and contour lines.
• Linking trees to income: Projects that combine ecological benefits with clear cash or food returns stand a better chance of surviving drought and political cycles.
• Targeting specific landscapes: Focusing resources on priority catchments – for example, the Upper Manyame or Save River headwaters – can show visible impact faster.

In districts such as Nyanga, Insiza, and Mbire, where erosion and woodland loss now threaten both grazing and cropping, a Zimbabwean version of Direct Beneficiary Grants could accelerate work that communities have already begun with limited means.

What Kind Of Projects Could Zimbabwean Groups Learn From?

Even without direct eligibility, Zimbabwean farmers’ organisations and NGOs can watch the DBG-supported projects in DRC, Kenya, Togo, and Tanzania as a practical “classroom” for restoration finance.

Examples likely to emerge include:

• Tree planting tied to value chains: Fruit orchards, timber lots, or medicinal tree plots linked to local markets, much like emerging initiatives around macadamia and avocado in eastern Zimbabwe.
• Soil and water conservation: Terraces, infiltration pits, and stone bunds that resonate with existing conservation agriculture work in Zimbabwe’s Pfumvudza/Intwasa programme.
• Restoration-based enterprises: Beekeeping in restored woodlands, herbal products from indigenous species, or eco-tourism partnerships around rehabilitated hills and wetlands.

For youth and women in Zimbabwe’s rural wards, the message is clear: restoration is not just about meeting climate targets. It can underpin new forms of enterprise, from seedling production to honey processing, if funding models recognise and support local initiative.

Who Should Pay Attention Now?

In the four eligible countries, the immediate audience is clear: community-based organisations, cooperatives, local NGOs, and producer associations already active in forestry, agroforestry, or sustainable agriculture.

These groups have until 19 June 2026 to align their project ideas with FAO’s guidelines, clarify budgets, and show how their work will deliver both environmental and livelihood gains.

In Zimbabwe, a different group needs to take note:

• Policy-makers in the Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Development,
• Environmental agencies and research institutions,
• Farmer unions and commodity associations,
• Youth and women’s platforms working on climate and livelihoods.

AFR100’s DBG window shows how international partners are increasingly willing to fund small, local projects that deliver visible, measurable restoration. With NDS1, Zimbabwe already has a policy anchor. The next step is building a pipeline of credible local projects – from community nurseries in Wedza to watershed protection in Matobo – ready to absorb that kind of finance when it becomes available here.

On that eroded slope in Chimanimani, a single grant will not rebuild the land overnight. But as FAO’s new window opens in parts of the continent, it underlines a simple truth for Zimbabwe and its neighbours: the people best placed to heal damaged landscapes are those who walk them every day, if the resources finally meet them where they live.

📲 Subscribe to our WhatsApp Channel to Get Our Updates On Your Mobile

About The Author

Editor at Large

Farm & Future Africa (FFA) was born from the realization that Zimbabwe’s profound agricultural resilience and innovation needed a clear, authoritative voice to connect with the continent and the world.

See author's posts